Hack Pro Computer Build

[Brennan Robideaux]

Thank you everyone for the positive feedback. The system is running great and fast as hell. My two monitors finally came in. They are Dell UltraSharp U2312HM 23" Monitor with LED

Check out the pics:


EDIT: Forgot to mention but the colors are fantastic! Obviously nothing can compete with an iMac screen, but these are top notch and look amazing.

 

[Björn Benckert]

Nice,
what was the price for it all including shipping and such ?

 

[Brennan Robideaux]

Bjorn - The total price was about $2200 plus $300 for the two monitors. The monitors are normally $250 a piece but I snagged them on eBay for $150 a piece.

Shipping for all of my computer parts was only like $20 from Newegg.

 

[George A.]

Hi!

Can you use a Red Rocket in this system?

Otherwise... any disadvantages at all compared to using an original Mac Pro?

Thanks!

 

[Brennan Robideaux]

From Spencer (the man who basically built the computer while I "helped"):

As far as a RED Rocket Card -- I don't see why it wouldn't work. This motherboard has three PCI Express (x16) slots. Two of them are unused, with the third being for the video card. If the RED Card requires power, also, then this PSU could definitely handle the extra load. Theoretically, a RED card should work.


As for the Mac Pro.


The baseline Mac Pro, which starts at $2,500 (without tax), scored a 32-bit geekbench score of 9850. The Hackintosh scored a 32-bit geekbench score of 12766. However, systems with this similar configuration have scored a 64-bit mark around 14600. The next level Mac Pro (starting at $3,800), scored a 32-bit result of 17642 with the 64-bit being around 19900.


With that said, the Hackintosh's graphics card (the GTX 670) is significantly better. Video card benchmarks are attached to this post. There is a big difference.


The Mac Pro is a nice machine, but it's way too expensive. Letting Apple customize it is one thing, but it still won't be cheap to upgrade -- even if you do it yourself. The baseline Mac Pros come with 6gb of Ram, 1Tb of hard drive space, and a 3.2GHz Xeon processor, while the Hackintosh is significantly more loaded for a lesser price (monitors included).


In addition, the Mac Pros are like three years behind. Seriously -- the version they are selling now is the same as 2010 with maybe an upgraded hard drive and ram. The Mac Pro doesn't have USB 3.0 or thunderbolt, either.


In conclusion, this Hackintosh is an excellent investment for someone who is on a tight budget. However, if one is really set on purchasing a Mac Pro, then he should consider waiting before making a purchase. I'm sure Apple is working on the new Pro-lineup. I know i'd be really frustrated if I bought a Mac Pro, and three months later, Apple updates the specs.


For more specific info, see this:
http://www.everymac.com/systems/app...-twelve-core-2.4-mid-2010-westmere-specs.html
http://www.everymac.com/systems/app...pro-quad-core-3.2-mid-2010-nehalem-specs.html
http://www.videocardbenchmark.net/high_end_gpus.html

Also, please take a look at the attached geek bench scores of my graphics card in the Hackintosh vs the graphics card in the Mac Pros.



Hope this helps,

Brennan & Spencer

 

[Rainer Fritz]

Hi Brennan !

Great Setup. Would be interesting if we could install for example PCIe Deklink cards and drivers for resolve. With a Rocket inside it would be nice workhorse...
Very interesting would be if the thunderbolt is working....

thx
rainer

 

[Brennan Robideaux]

Rainer,

Thanks!

Like my last comment about the Rocket -- I don't see why Decklink cards or Resolve wouldn't work. They probably would work if tried.

I haven't tested my thunderbolt ports yet, because I don't have any thunderbolt appliances. According to other hackintosh users with the same motherboard, though, the thunderbolt ports work -- they just aren't hot-swappable. Meaning that if you wanted to plug something in with thunderbolt, you'd have to turn the machine off and boot with the object plugged in.

Oh well -- can't always get what we want, but at least i've got like 500 USB 3.0's :yesnod:

 

[BrandonChristensen]

Looks great!

I'm dancing on the line between this and a 27" iMac (3.4 i7, 2GB GTX and the 1TB Fusion).

How does yours compare to the new iMacs?

Also, I've heard that the GTX 570 actually works better for Premiere and the like than the new 6x series. Any truth to that?

Finally, what's up with Geekbench scores?

My 2006 Mac Pro (1.1 - Upgraded to 16GB RAM, 2x 3.00GHZ Quad Cores and a Radeon 5770) just scored a 9975 in 32-bit, and an 11075 in 64-bit. It can't mean much for real world performance I'm assuming.

 

[Doug Beatty]

I'm on a Hack running OSX 10.8.2 and everything is running really great. My mobo is showing its age a bit (EX-58 Extreme - no USB 3 or Thunderbolt), but I'm still getting around 17K on Geekbench with my six core Xeon W3680 OC'ed to 4.00 GHz.

I upgraded to a 2.5GB GTX 570 and one of the best parts about Mountain Lion is the native support for the 500 series. I didn't have to patch anything and OSX recognized the card right out of the box.

I have a Decklink Extreme 2 up and running with Resolve, but it's a bit shaky. The desktop video drivers post the card correctly but every once in a while if I have Final Cut open it monopolizes the Decklink and Resolve freezes and I have to do a complete uninstall, re-install using terminal.

Still, though, it works sending simultaneous HDMI out to my 55" LCD and component BNC to my 17 JVC broadcast monitor.

Hackintoshes will crash when and you will get sad about it for days or weeks trouble shooting it because each build is different. Also, there is so much information to parse through on forums and most of it will not fix your specific problem.

For example, I learned the hard way that I can't have Pro Tools on my system and I shouldn't cut in Final Cut for unknown reasons, but I'm willing to trade that for being able to crush renders in CS5.5 and Resolve.

 

[Adey_L]

Great job - thanks for the vids.

I've just bought the exact same spec iMac (and upgrading it to 32Gb RAM) as Brandon is contemplating. Didn't think of going down the hackintosh route.....

I'd be interested in the relative performances too. I may convert the (home built) PC I'm replacing with the iMac to a hackintosh - in fact, as I'm typing this I'm convincing myself to give it a go.

Incidentally, in the UK this spec iMac is £1800 plus 20% sales tax (~$2700+tax)

Adey

 

[James Webb]

After getting my BT R1MX and shooting some incredible footage, I brought them onto my iMac to learn that there is simply no way that I could ever edit anything from RED on it. Slow as molasses. Not too surprising.

So, I looked into the NoFilmSchool's updated hackintosh and modified it a bit for my liking. For those who are interested, here is the link to the wishlist that will be my hackintosh: http://secure.newegg.com/WishList/PublicWishDetail.aspx?WishListNumber=22278146 (couple pieces missing)

At around $2200, I think this is a pretty incredible computer. It shipped today, so if anyone would like me to post the results when it comes in, let me know.

Also used the following guide: http://tonymacx86.blogspot.com/search/label/CustoMac

Built two of them last month. First timer. Although I kinda know my way around a computer. Both have no issues and are super fast.

 

[Jamie_Guy]

Nice work Brennan, looks speedy. Question what do you think the render time would be for a ~10 min video with the mix of 4k & 2K with standard effects, 3 way etc..?

 

[Brennan Robideaux]

Hi Jamie. So sorry for the late response... I didn't even see your comment. Render time is going to be pretty similar to any other computer. Without a RED Rocket, the hack pro (and any other computer) will have a slower render time when dealing with RED footage. The point of this computer is to speed up the performance leading up to the render.

I have never owned the RED Rocket but I have heard things about it that would be something like a 10 min video taking 10 minutes to render. Pretty much a 1:1 ratio for rendering with the Rocket.

Without that, you are looking at close to 20 times the length of the video. For example, I brought in a 30 sec clip with no effects and that took close to 5 minutes to render.